Free Telephone Workers Union v.

Minister of Labor
GR No. L-58184 / 30 Oct 1981 / C.J. Fernando
 
FACTS
This is a facial challenge to BP 130. amending Article 264 of the Labor Code, which states:
"In labor disputes causing or likely to cause strikes or lockouts adversely affecting the national interest,
such as may occur in but not limited to public utilities, companies engaged in the generation or
distribution of energy, banks, hospitals, and those within export processing zones, the Minister of Labor
and Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it or certify the same to the
Commission for compulsory arbitration."
 
Free Telephone Workers Union, a union inside PLDT, contends that insofar as the provision delegates to
the Minister of Labor and Employment the power and discretion to assume jurisdiction and/or certify
strikes for compulsory arbitration to the NLRC, and in effect make or unmake the law on free collective
bargaining, is an undue delegation of legislative powers.They also assert that the conferment of
authority runs contrary to the assurance of the State to the workers' right to self-organization and
collective bargaining.
 
Other facts
Notice of strike for ULP was submitted with the Minister of Labor on 14 Sep 1981, for the ff grounds:
1. Unilateral and arbitrary implementation of a Code of Conduct to the detriment and interest of
the union members
2. Illegal terminations and suspensions of union officers and members as a result of the
implementation of the Code
3. Unconfirmation(sic) of call sick leaves and its automatic treatment as AWOL with corresponding
suspensions in violation of the CBA
 
The 2/3 strike vote and other formal requirements of the law were confirmed on 15 Sep. The Ministry
held several conciliation meetings, but meanwhile on 25 Sep the Minister of Labor certified the labor
dispute to the NLRC for compulsory arbitration and enjoined any strike at PLDT's establishment.
 
Meanwhile a certiorari petition was filed with the SC, challenging the constitutionality of the law.
 
ISSUE / HELD
W/N there was an undue delegation of legislative powers under BP 130. NO, but SC did not pass over
the factual issues (the application of the law) of the case.
 
RATIO
1. The power of the Minister of Labor is essentially executive, under the competence of the
President. The fact that the Minister is a member of the BP is an element of the parliamentary
nature of the 1973 constitution, but in performing his role in the execution of legislation, the
Minister is an official of the executive branch.
 
Discussion of the role of the PM in the 1973 Constitution (not sure if relevant, read the case for
more information)
In the 1973 Constitution, the Prime Minister shall be the head of cabinet, but he shall be
nominated by the President to the position, thereafter being elected by the members of the BP.
 He is primarily, therefore a Presidential choice. His duration or term depends on Presidential
pleasure, not on legislative approval. Any other member of the Cabinet or the Executive
Committee may be removed at the Presidents' discretion.
 
The 1973 Constitution contains the words: "All powers vested in the President of the Philippines
under the 1935 Constitution and the laws of the land which are not herein provided for or
conferred upon any official shall be deemed and are hereby vested in the President unless the
Batasang Pambansa provides otherwise." Meanwhile the 1935 Constitution says that "The
Executive power shall be vested in the President of the Philippines."
 
2. The acts of the members of Cabinet are presumptively the acts of the Presidnet. This was the
doctrine in Villena v. Secretary of the Interior. It was reiterated under the 1973 Constitution in
Philippine Maerican Management Co. v. Philippine American Management Employees Association,
where the question is the same as in this case, the power of the Secretary of Labor to refer to the
then Court of Industrial Relations for abitration the dispute that led to a strike. What was done by
him as a department head, in the regular course of business and conforming to a statutory
provision is presumptively the act of the President, who is the only dignitary who could disapprove
or reprobate it.
 
Secretaries of departemnts, exercise certain powers under the but the law cannot impair or in any
way affect the constitutional power of control and direction of the President. As a matter of
executive policy, they may be granted departmental autonomy as to certain matters but this is by
mere concession of the executive, in the absence of valid legislation in the particular field.
 
Relevant portion - delegation of legislative powers
3. Even assuming the grant of power to the Minister of Labor is legislative, still there is no unlawful
delegation. What cannot be delegated is the authority under the Constitution to make laws and to
alter and repeal them, the test is the completeness of the statute in all its term and provisions
when it leaves the hands of the legislature. To determine whether or not there is an undue
delegation of legislative power, the inquiry must be directed to the scope and definiteness of th
measure enacted. The legislature does not abdicate its functions when it describes what job must
be done, who is to do it, and what is the scope of his authority.
 
To avoid the taint of unlawful delegation, there must be a standard, which implies at the very
least that the legislature itself determines matters of principle and lays down fundamental
policy. A standard defines legislative policy, marks its limits, maps out its boundaries and
specifies the public agency to apply it. It indicates the circumstances under which the legislative
command is to be effected. It is the criterion by which legislative purpose may be carried out.
 
There is a distinctuon between delegation of power to make laws, involving the discretion as to
what the law shall be, which is unconstitutional, and the delegation of authority or discretion as to
its execution. With the growing complexity of modern life, the multiplication of the subjects of
governmental regulation, and the increased difficulty of administering the laws, there is a
constantly growing tendency toward the delegation of greater powers by the legislature and
toward the approval of the practice by the courts.
 
In People v. Exconde, "all that is required [for delegation] is that the regulation should be germane
tot eh objects and purposes of the law, that the regulation be not in contradiction with it, but
 conform to the standards that the law prescribes." BP 130 cannot be any clearer, the coverage
being limited to "strikes or lockouts adversely affecting the national interest."
 
4. With the 1973 Constitution as originally adopted making the executive and legislative branches
closer, the objection on the grounds of non-delegation is less persuasive. The PM, even with the
choice of the President, must have the approval of all the members of the BP. While the PM and
the Cabinet are responsible to the BP for the program of governemnt, it must be one "approved
by the President." The fundamental principle of separation of powers of which non-delegation is a
logical corollary becomes more flesible and malleable.
 
A rigid application of the non-delegation doctrine, therefore, would be an obstacle to national
efforts at development and progress. There is accordingly more receptivity to laws leaving to
administrative and executive agencies the adoption of such means as may be necessary to
effectuate a valid legislative purpose. According to Professor Jaffe, a legal scholar, delegation is
the "dynamo of modern government."
 
5. Thus the Court upholds BP 130, although there is no ruling on the question of whether or not it
has been unconstitutionally applied in this case (as the case is yet to go through the lower courts).
Stressed anew is that the power of compulsory arbitration while allowable under the Constitution
and quite understandable in labor disputes affected with a national interest, to be free from the
taint of unconstitutionality, must be exercised in accordance with the constitutional mandate of
protection to labor.